On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Rainer D?bele wrote:
looks like we're running in circles with that struts2 extentions
release. Partially it is probably my own fault since I did not question
Thomas' findings but I must say I am not really fond of all these legal
issues.
Nobody is fond of that. But, if you want people to respect your own
license, you better respect other people's licenses.
Personally I would really like to bundle the servlet-api and jsp-api in
order to have a nice clean and easy build process. I am also willing to
change the release build scripts once again.
I have no problem with including the tomcat libraries.
However I would like everyone to acknolege that the process of making a
release build, uploading it, calling for vote on the dev-list, wainting
or 72 hours, posting the result, calling for voting on the general list,
... is quite a tedious task and costs J?rg and me a lot of time.
I would really appreciate if anyone who want's to check the release
would do this, while we're voting on the empire-db-dev list and not
leave it until we're on the general-incubator list. This would make life
for us a lot easier.
I would also rather like to check the release while the vote is on
empire-db-dev. But then the 72 hours is way too short. Remember that the
mentors are non-paid volunteers and are doing the review in their spare
time, and it also costs us a lot of time. If we do not have time in two
successive evenings, the vote is closed. I'd appreciate a 7 days voting
period.
We have run though this whole process three times now, and we still have
no binding positive votes for the struts2-extentions yet. If there are
any objections with what we currently offer as the release we should
really discuss and resolve them before our next attempt.
It does not build by default, and there is no documentation on how to
build it (at least I did not find it, and though I asked it [1] nobody
pointed it out, so I assume that it is not there). It does build if one
downloads the servlet and jsp api and puts them in the appropriate
directory with the appropriate name, but this needs to be documented.
Furthermore the question is how we will be able to get three binding
votes at all on the general incubator list. Unfortuately there has
recently been litte interest in this matter so all we can hope for is a
positive vote of Henning, Thomas and Martijn. So my question goes
especially to those three: How can procede in order to get a positive
vote from you.
We are three mentors, this should be enough to get three positive votes
if the issues are resolved. The 1.0.3 release candidate has still the
freemarker license problem, and the 1.0.4 release has no build
documentation, so both are problematic. I'd vote +1 on a 1.0.5 rc with
either the jsp api and servlet api from tomcat, or an appropriate build
documentation (which would be a good idea even if you'd include the jars)
Please take into accout, that the distribution currently avaialbe for
downlaod from our project web-site and source-forge has nothing to do
with apache at all. This will make it even harder to attract new users.
The difference betweeen apache and sourceforge is that apache projects
have some kind of overwiew, and sourceforge hasn't. If you do not want the
overwiew, and think that it is too much hassle, there is always the
sourceforge alternative.
Thomas
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200809.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
